1108,09AW 同主题写作第二期 ISSUE7 by TonyLic

TonyLicUID：3037612

Position: Partially agree
1. 在艺术的基础教育领域，政府应该提供足够的资金使得热衷于艺术但缺乏资金支持的年轻人接受教育。这样的确能保证艺术的繁荣发展。
2.在艺术的创作领域，政府没理由支持艺术（提供资金与艺术繁荣没有关系，艺术也不要求所有人享受）。进一步，政府资金危害艺术（政治利益融入艺术创作，反而损害艺术的完整性）。
3.另外，政府没有责任提供资金，因为政府的职能是保护人权，而艺术的发展应该交由市场。



With the development of economy, more andmore people pay attention to arts, such as music, paintings, sculpture andliterature. At the same time, many governments have funding for arts. Herecomes a question: whether government funding of the arts is necessary to ensurethat arts can flourish and be available to all people or threatens theintegrity of the arts.

As far as I concerned, many fundamental educationof arts are so expensive that many normal people who are interested in art andqualified for a further education are unaffordable for the tuition of artschool. In this situation, government funding of the arts have responsibilityto ensure that every young man who is devoted to arts can acquire anopportunity for further study. Moreover, if fundamental education of arts canbe access to every young man who loves arts because of government funding ofthe arts, the arts will flourish continually. So in my opinion, the support offundamental education of arts from government funding is absolutely indispensable.

However, fundamental education of arts isnot equal to creation of arts. Firstly, government has no reason to set fundingto support creation of arts. It is known to us all that in this world any governmentcan’t give all artist funding for creation, so the government funding of thearts is just able to help part of artists. Thus, it is ridiculous to say thatfunding for part artist can ensure the flourish of arts. On the other hand, art,which is always belonged to minority, never have necessity to be available toall people.

Furthermore, especially for creation ofarts, the government funding of arts will definitely threaten the integrity ofart and harm art itself. Undoubtedly, government, an evil monster, alwaysdesire to expand its power and control everything in the country. Therefore, ifgovernment provides funding for creation of arts, it will surely take its ownpolitical interest to arts, and then control arts to serve for governmentitself and finally destroy arts. For example, in china, writers can get enough moneyfrom government if they join in the official writer organization. It soundslike good that writers have an assurance of life. However, the worst is, noneof them would write any critical word about government, which have many problemsin fact.

On the other hand, government has noresponsibility to ensure funding for arts. It is impossible that if artist canget funding from government, every trade in the society has an equal right todo that. Actually, I think the basic duty of government is to ensure basichuman rights and equal chance in market, not providing funding for every trade,include art. It is an advisable way to let art survive in market economy.Aiweiwei, a famous Chinese artist in the world, is served as a good example. Henever receives any funding from government and only makes money by hiswonderful products. His experiences prove that in market economy an artistwithout funding from government can be successful.

Inconclusion, in fundamental education of arts, government funding of the artshave benefit in bringing in more talent artists. However, in creation of arts,government should not take any steps with arts, otherwise, arts will be harmed.